BFett wrote:Multiple complete sentences explaining your point would be welcome. These extremely short replies simply push me away from the topic.

theres a whole thread behind that words, but yeah.

basically separating research and designing equipment.

you dont research whole pieces of equipment, but only components of them

for example a laser cannon consists out of a lasing array and a focusing array.

and you combine those components to get your equipment.

the components have different characteristics which modify how your equipment behaves.

so you can upgrade/modify your equipment by swapping out components of your equipment

That would be A Reinterpretation Of Research, as I understood it. Modifying a vessel is somewhat similar but not quite there.

Modifying a vessel's premise is that you've spent enough time hanging around your ship doing maintenance and all that fun stuff and you've decided to start making improvements on the way things are running. See a way that your thrusters could push you faster? Set down on that asteroid, and whip out the toolbox.

You then forget to draw the Blueprints. Every single time. Which means that the only person capable of preforming the upgrades that exist on your ship- on any ship really- is you, or whoever made the upgrades in the first place.

The results of logic, of natural progression? Boring! An expected result? Dull! An obvious next step? Pfui! Where is the fun in that? A dream may soothe, but our nightmares make us run!

Idunno wrote:
Modifying a vessel's premise is that you've spent enough time hanging around your ship doing maintenance and all that fun stuff and you've decided to start making improvements on the way things are running. See a way that your thrusters could push you faster? Set down on that asteroid, and whip out the toolbox.

You then forget to draw the Blueprints. Every single time. Which means that the only person capable of preforming the upgrades that exist on your ship- on any ship really- is you, or whoever made the upgrades in the first place.

The tinkering around could simply create a new component out of an already existing, already mounted one.

unifying it with general research and design and making the modifications less wonky and and oddity

Idunno wrote:
Modifying a vessel's premise is that you've spent enough time hanging around your ship doing maintenance and all that fun stuff and you've decided to start making improvements on the way things are running. See a way that your thrusters could push you faster? Set down on that asteroid, and whip out the toolbox.

You then forget to draw the Blueprints. Every single time. Which means that the only person capable of preforming the upgrades that exist on your ship- on any ship really- is you, or whoever made the upgrades in the first place.

The tinkering around could simply create a new component out of an already existing, already mounted one.

unifying it with general research and design and making the modifications less wonky and and oddity

See? Similar.

The results of logic, of natural progression? Boring! An expected result? Dull! An obvious next step? Pfui! Where is the fun in that? A dream may soothe, but our nightmares make us run!

A prototype is the top level of research, the master piece of technology from which all else derives. You can think of it as a master blueprint, i.e. the original technical description of an object. Imagine a data disk full of technical information and holographic projections of the object.

To research a new variation of a technology, you need to have a prototype. To create blueprints for production, you need to have a prototype. A prototype is the highest of high knowledge of an object, and ownership of it indicates that the owner has a full understanding of the technologies that power an object (because that understanding is contained within the prototype).

Prototypes are created in tech labs, and must either be created from 'first principles' (which is used to create the starting point for any family of object technologies), or from another prototype (which is used to create a new and improved variation of a previous-gen technology). This mechanism is the same as the technology nodes of which I spoke in the original research proposal. Nothing has changed there - procedural trade-off modifiers, slow vertical progress, etc. A prototype is just a tech node. But it's not some abstract dot in a tree - it's a real item, and you'll need to actually transport it to the location of your research lab if you want to use it.

Blueprints

Every production process now requires a consumable blueprint. A blueprint, like a prototype, is created in a tech lab, but comes from a prototype. Think of it as a sparse data disk of the object - it contains only enough information to manufacture the object, but not enough to give away the technology therein. The owner of a prototype uses that prototype to create blueprints, which can then be sold to others for use in production runs. Blueprints are programmed to self-destruct after a run, since the owner of the corresponding prototype does not want to give away unlimited license to produce the item. In this way, you can alternatively think of a blueprint as a license to produce a single instance of the item.

Blueprints are the primary way in which technology is traded in the marketplace. Creating a blueprint from a prototype takes time, but, unlike performing new research, it takes a fixed amount of time, meaning blueprint creation can be set up as a continual process. At an abstract level, the trade of blueprints in the marketplace really represents the continual licensing between factions to use one another's technology.

I just read through the entire thread. It seems that the reason to have Upgrades is to make modifications to a vessel without the need for a market. Many people seem to not understand why this is necessary. So, since upgrades are supposed to be across all items and done individually what is the downside for them? Is it just a one time expense that is unique for a single ship? Do these upgrades have any inherent cost associated with them?

This is also why I brought up the Techlab, Prototype/Blueprint, Assembly Chip system. I'm trying to identify the pros and cons of this system compared to the long and costly process of researching or buying a whole new item.

BFett wrote:I just read through the entire thread. It seems that the reason to have Upgrades is to make modifications to a vessel without the need for a market. Many people seem to not understand why this is necessary. So, since upgrades are supposed to be across all items and done individually what is the downside for them? Is it just a one time expense that is unique for a single ship? Do these upgrades have any inherent cost associated with them?

This is also why I brought up the Techlab, Prototype/Blueprint, Assembly Chip system. I'm trying to identify the pros and cons of this system compared to the long and costly process of researching or buying a whole new item.

well, with the module based approach there would be no difference between upgrading or designing a new piece of equipment, its the same.

if you assemble equipment from components or just swap out a component, the effect is the same.

research would not create any new pieces of eqipment but new components (which may be interchangeable between eqipment types).

so instead of researching a shield with more capacity, you research better capacitors and design a new shield with that capacitors or refit already existing shields

Module instancing is actually proving to be a slightly difficult problem to hash out. Getting a good way to track 10,000 eventual variations on a single blueprint for every single blueprint without making the system cry is probably doable, but is beyond my realm of expertise. Just as a brief outline of my thoughts:

Blueprints are folders, but also instructions coded with the particular Tech stats. Inside the folder is a registry of every unique instance yet made and its stats, each tagged with the owner and where it's used. The owner and usage tags change freely via trade & plunder.

The currently simulated blueprints are known scripts, executed as necessary, changing the stats of the given instance.

Players & NPCs can also execute their own scripts (aftermarket modifications, improved/shoddy construction techniques & materials, overclocking, etc)on a particular instance which also changes the instance stats, but are wholly different from blueprint scripts. Such modifications don't affect the registry serial, but can affect the Human-readable name.

Destroyed instances (or intact but attached to destroyed ships/stations) continue to exist in the registry for potential salvage and reactivation until a periodic registry cleanup.

Temporary instances can also be attached with semi-random stats to permanent debris fields, but disappear as soon as a player is out of range.

Challenging your assumptions is good for your health, good for your business, and good for your future. Stay skeptical but never undervalue the importance of a new and unfamiliar perspective.Imagination Fertilizer
Beauty may not save the world, but it's the only thing that can

Module instancing is actually proving to be a slightly difficult problem to hash out. Getting a good way to track 10,000 eventual variations on a single blueprint for every single blueprint without making the system cry is probably doable, but is beyond my realm of expertise. Just as a brief outline of my thoughts:

[12-24-35-2223-546]=Object Serial Number.

[2223-546]=Unique blueprint identifier.

[35]=Range stat.

[24]=Damage stat.

[12]=Health stat.

[?]=Whatever you need...

The results of logic, of natural progression? Boring! An expected result? Dull! An obvious next step? Pfui! Where is the fun in that? A dream may soothe, but our nightmares make us run!

Challenging your assumptions is good for your health, good for your business, and good for your future. Stay skeptical but never undervalue the importance of a new and unfamiliar perspective.Imagination Fertilizer
Beauty may not save the world, but it's the only thing that can